Maybe as part of the 30 year anniversary

[MikeWaters]

they can expunge this part of the lesson to the Aaronic priesthood on marriage.

It seems that a church with a history of racism, that it is trying to shake off, ought not be preaching against miscegenation.

Folks, racism is still here, and still taught in the official literature.

Compare the results of the vote with the following statement by President Spencer W. Kimball. Have a young man read it.

“We recommend that people marry those who are of the same racial background generally, and of somewhat the same economic and social and educational background (some of those are not an absolute necessity, but preferred), and above all, the same religious background, without question” (“Marriage and Divorce,” in 1976 Devotional Speeches of the Year [Provo: Brigham Young University Press, 1977], p. 144).

*

• Why is it so important for a couple to be worthy members of the Church? Ensure that the following points are discussed:
*

1. Exaltation cannot be attained without celestial marriage.
*

2. Religious values are powerful, and conflicting values can cause continual stress.
*

3. President Kimball quoted a survey showing that “only about one out of seven non-member spouses would be converted and baptized into the Church” (“Marriage and Divorce,” p. 152).
*

4. When one spouse is not converted to the gospel, the children are caught between the differing values of the parents.
*

• Why is it important for a couple to have a similar economic, educational, and cultural background?

http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vg...____&hideNav=1

[Indy Coug]

That guidance is just as classist or intellectually elitist as it is racist. Why no indignation about either of those?

[MikeWaters]

I thought I would focus on the church's institutional continued racism, we can get to the other stuff later.

Yet again, you display no indignation yourself towards racism.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I thought I would focus on the church's institutional continued racism, we can get to the other stuff later.

Yet again, you display no indignation yourself towards racism.

Rather than looking at this item by item, why do you think he mentioned those four things as a group? Could it be because to a certain extent that marriage has the deck stacked against it?

How easy 30 years ago would it be to have an interracial marriage? What about your kids? Would it lead to difficulties because of how society treats you? Would there be troubles in terms of not having a shared cultural heritage so you could best understand each other? These are pragmatic questions, not borne of blind racism.

Why don't you make the odds on the marriage of a poor, white trash guy who didn't finish high school marrying a Muslim Saudi Princess lasting more than 10 years, let alone eternity?

P.S. I've descended from an interracial marriage.

[MikeWaters]

“Malignant racial biases can and do reside in interracial liaisons,” Kennedy wrote. “But against the tragic backdrop of American history, the flowering of multiracial intimacy is a profoundly moving and encouraging development.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18090277/

[ChinoCoug]

I had an AA roommate who works for Harry Reid. He joined the church in the military. He's a strong believer in marrying his own race. He said that during sex, all white girls do is lie there. No fun.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18090277/

From the same article:

Love can take its toll

The stresses on interracial couples can take a toll. The National Center for Health Statistics says their chances of a breakup within 10 years are 41 percent, compared to 31 percent for a couple of the same race.

In some categories of interracial marriage, there are distinct gender-related trends. More than twice as many black men marry white women as vice versa, and about three-fourths of white-Asian marriages involve white men and Asian women.

C.N. Le, a Vietnamese-American who teaches sociology at the University of Massachusetts, says the pattern has created some friction in Asian-American communities.

“Some of the men view the women marrying whites as sellouts, and a lot of Asian women say, ’Well, we would want to date you more, but a lot of you are sexist or patriarchal,”’ said Le, who attributes the friction in part to gender stereotypes of Asians that have been perpetuated by American films and TV shows.

[MikeWaters]

A church rife with a history of racism and opposition to civil rights, ought not be preaching against miscegenation.

Because preaching against miscegenation is racist.

[MikeWaters]

A church rife with a history of racism and opposition to civil rights, ought not be preaching against miscegenation.

Because preaching against miscegenation is racist.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

A church rife with a history of racism and opposition to civil rights, ought not be preaching against miscegenation.

Because preaching against miscegenation is racist.

Did you not even read the above quoted section?